The North American Union

[Mehmentum]

The EU has been having quite a bit of trouble lately.  While a NAU is a cool idea that I would definitely be open too it, the logistics of it are a nightmare. 

[Goldwater]

I'm not sure if it's a good idea, but I'm not entirely against the idea either.

[Bandit3 the Worker]

Horrible idea. Look at the trouble the EU has caused.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

A horrible idea, and reason to leave the country.

[Blue3]

I'd rather just make Canada and Mexico become 25 new states in the USA.

[DC Al Fine]

Just say no to American imperialism.

[opebo]

I'd welcome the inclusion of any new left-wing voters.. and I guess both Canadia and Mexico would fit that bill.  But on the other hand all those mexican poors might depress wages if a high minimum wage and generous dole were not enforced.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Economically, Mexico and the US are too dissimilar for a union to be reasonable right now.  While economically it wouldn't cause significant problems in either the US or Canada if we were to merge,  I can't see Canada agreeing to join.  The only realistic prospect for the US to grow to the north would be Quebec leaves Canada, causing further shocks. Conceivably, the US could pick up the rest of Anglo-Canada, gaining as many as eight new states.

(Yes I know there are ten Canadian provinces, but Quebec wouldn't join in such a situation, and PEI is too small to be an American state, so it would either remain independent,  become a non-state territory, or be joined to New Brunswick either by itself or as part of a combined state formed from the Maritimes.)

[freefair]

I'd welcome the inclusion of any new left-wing voters.. and I guess both Canadia and Mexico would fit that bill.  But on the other hand all those mexican poors might depress wages if a high minimum wage and generous dole were not enforced.

Canada has a conservative federal government and mostly centre right governed provinces so I don't know why you'd assume that.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I'd welcome the inclusion of any new left-wing voters.. and I guess both Canadia and Mexico would fit that bill.  But on the other hand all those mexican poors might depress wages if a high minimum wage and generous dole were not enforced.

Canada has a conservative federal government and mostly centre right governed provinces so I don't know why you'd assume that.

This is mostly due to vote split though, and in an American context it's pretty clear both Liberals and the NDP would be democrats (and so could a few moderate conservatives, as well).

[freefair]

I'm pretty sure in this hypothetical situation the US 2 party system would have to be opened up.
Point taken though. Lets not fall into the trap of "you are either for or against x", I'm sure a very large proportion of Liberals prefer the Tories to the NDP.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I'm sure a very large proportion of Liberals prefer the Tories to the NDP.

Certainly... but not Republicans over Democrats. You have to realize that the GOP is a far-right party by the standards of any other western country.

[DC Al Fine]

I'm pretty sure in this hypothetical situation the US 2 party system would have to be opened up.
Point taken though. Lets not fall into the trap of "you are either for or against x", I'm sure a very large proportion of Liberals prefer the Tories to the NDP.

It was a big deal when Alberta wanted to legalise private health care. Opinion polls consistently put Canadians at about 80/20 Democrat. Adding Canada onto the USA would guarantee Democratic victories until the parties had a chance to realign.

After the political centre shifted left, you'd eventually see the GOP shift left as well and some swing states like Virginia, North Carolina and Colorado swing back to the GOP as former NDP politicians make the Democrats the wacko party.

[Dr. Cynic]

Mexico is too dissimilar in culture and personality for me to welcome a union with them, however, I would very much like to merge with Canada.

[Hatman 🍁]

All this annexation talk is making me uncomfortable

I'd rather just make Canada and Mexico become 25 new states in the USA.

That will go over well, considering Canada has 10 provinces and Mexico has 30 states.

[Blue3]

All this annexation talk is making me uncomfortable

I'd rather just make Canada and Mexico become 25 new states in the USA.

That will go over well, considering Canada has 10 provinces and Mexico has 30 states.

I know.

[Hatman 🍁]

All this annexation talk is making me uncomfortable

I'd rather just make Canada and Mexico become 25 new states in the USA.

That will go over well, considering Canada has 10 provinces and Mexico has 30 states.

I know.

Oh dear...

[Antonio the Sixth]

All this annexation talk is making me uncomfortable

I'd rather just make Canada and Mexico become 25 new states in the USA.

That will go over well, considering Canada has 10 provinces and Mexico has 30 states.

I know.

Seeking to dilute Senatorial voting power?

[Antonio the Sixth]

Anyway, I've always though it would be pretty cool to have Canada merge with the US (not Mexico though, for the reasons stated by others). This would make America better much better, for sure. On the other hand, that would not be good for Canadians...

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Like Ernest said, the Mexican and US economies are too dissimilar for any kind of merge.  Also, I'm not sure what good could come out of it.  Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the fact that members of the EU can borrow at their own discretion and generally use the same currency part of the reason they're in their present situation?

[Sbane]

The US should annex Canada. Not sure if Quebec would like it, but they can always form their own little country. We should also annex Baja Mexico. The rest of Mexico can remain their own country.

[TNF]

Depends on what the structure would look like. If it's anything like the neoliberal EU, then I would be opposed to it. But if integration with Canada and Mexico meant that we Americans would get Canadian health care and labor standards (to say nothing of union protections and the higher minimum wage that would come with it), then I would lean towards supporting such a project.

[Hatman 🍁]

This thread is very, very frightening.

[angus]

The EU has been having quite a bit of trouble lately.  While a NAU is a cool idea that I would definitely be open too it, the logistics of it are a nightmare. 

a North American union already exists, although it is usually called the United States of America.  It is like the European Union in many ways.  There is one common currency in the North American Union.  The North American Union is large, with a land area about twice the size of the European Union and a population about 2/3 that of the European Union.  It also has a disproportionately large aggregate GDP.  About 15 trillion dollars annually, the same as the European Union.  They even have the same initials.  In Spanish the United States is Estados Unidos and in French it is Etats Unis, so both of those languages would abbreviate the North American Union as EU.  Although, technically speaking the European Union in those two languages would be abbreviated UE (for Unión Europea in Spanish and Union Europeénne in French.)

The are also different in many ways.  The North American Union has been around for a very long time.  It was founded in 1787, with the ratification of the US Constitution, whereas the European Union gradually evolved beginning in 1957 with the Treaty of Rome.  Also, the North American Union, which I shall henceforth call the US, has a more homogeneous language system.  In the US, you see official documents and signs posted in maybe 3 or 4 languages, rather than 12.  The US also a legal system which trumps the legal systems of its constituent states.  In fact, the phrase "the United States is" had fully supplanted the phrase "these United States are" in the popular press by about 1840, more than two decades before the question of states' rights versus strong central government was settled by the sword.  This is important.  If you are going to have a common currency, then you must also have the ability to set policy.  The central government cannot loan money to member states on promises that those states may choose or may not choose to keep.  This is probably the biggest difference between the two Unions, and it is the reason that the US will not have the troubles to which you tacitly refer.

[dead0man]

I don't understand why everybody is so against Mexico joining our theoretical NAU.  Sure, the first decade might hurt a little, but in in the long run it would be beneficial to both Americans and Mexicans.  Especially Mexicans.  And why stop there?  Central America would be an obvious next step.  I'm not sure if going into South America would work, but maybe a few decades after Panama joins up...